In the United States, a child must turn 5 years old by September 1st in order to enroll in kindergarten that year, although the exact cutoff date can vary by school district. If they turn five after September 1st, they have to wait until the following year to start kindergarten.
For example, if your birthday is August 5th and the cutoff date for your school was September 1st, then you could have been 11 to 12 months younger than a student born in September. If you were born in the six months leading up to the cutoff date, you can consider yourself relatively younger. If you were born in the six months immediately following the cutoff date, you can consider yourself relatively older.
Relative Age
Were you relatively younger or older than your classmates when you entered school?
The closer a student’s birthday is to their school’s cutoff date, the more dramatic the relative age effect is.
A student with an August birthday would be 17% younger than a classmate born in September.
States and school districts do not have to adhere to a September 1st cutoff, but most still fall between August and October.
A student with an August birthday would be 17% younger than a classmate born in September.
The closer a student’s birthday is to their school’s cutoff date, the more dramatic the relative age effect is.
You were likely at a disadvantage compared to your relatively older classmates. Research has found that relatively younger children lag behind their older peers in measurements of cognitive, motor, and socio-emotional performance. According to a 2021 systematic review of relative age effect research, “relatively younger schoolchildren have lower levels of socio-emotional adjustment and lower self-esteem than relatively older ones.” On average, relatively younger students also have fewer friends and meet with them less frequently. They also more often communicate with those friends electronically, compared to their older classmates.
The maturity gap observed between relatively younger and older school children can also significantly influence the perception of potential neurodevelopmental disorders. Harvard Medical School researchers found that students born in August, usually the relatively youngest in their cohort, had a 34% higher rate of ADHD diagnosis than their older classmates. And if a younger student is diagnosed with ADHD, they are more likely to receive longer, more intensive medical treatment than an older classmate diagnosed with ADHD.
You were likely at an advantage compared to your relatively younger classmates. Research has found that relatively older children surpass their younger peers in measurements of cognitive, motor, and socio-emotional performance. According to a 2021 systematic review of relative age effect research, “relatively younger schoolchildren have lower levels of socio-emotional adjustment and lower self-esteem than relatively older ones.” On average, relatively older students also have more friends and meet with them more frequently. They also more often communicate with those friends in person, compared to their younger classmates.
The maturity gap observed between relatively younger and older school children can also significantly influence the perception of potential neurodevelopmental disorders. Harvard Medical School researchers found that students born in August, usually the relatively youngest in their cohort, had a 34% higher rate of ADHD diagnosis than their older classmates. And if a younger student is diagnosed with ADHD, they are more likely to receive longer, more intensive medical treatment than an older classmate diagnosed with ADHD.
Advanced Placement
Were you placed in any advanced classes or programs in school?
Researchers have found that the oldest students score 4-12 percentiles higher than the youngest students at the fourth grade level.
Older students who test better than their younger peers are more likely to be chosen for gifted and talented programs.
Younger students who don’t test as well as older classmates are more likely to repeat a grade while their peers move forward.
Researchers have found that the oldest students score 4-12 percentiles higher than the youngest students at the fourth grade level.
Older students who test better than their younger peers are not only more likely to be chosen for gifted and talented programs, they’re also less likely to repeat a grade.
The relative age effect becomes less impactful as children get older and the gap between the youngest and oldest students becomes less significant. But researchers have found that relatively younger children on average still score significantly lower than their older classmates until at least the eighth grade.
The difference in test scores can widen the gap caused by the relative age effect significantly. Relatively younger schoolchildren repeat grades more frequently than their older classmates. Even if they do advance to the next grade, they are less likely to be chosen for advanced coursework, like gifted and talented programs or AP classes. This practice is known as “tracking,” and it plays a significant role in perpetuating the relative age effect in later years when the direct influence of the effect dissipates. Because you were not placed in any advanced classes or programs in school, the skills gap between you and your relatively older classmates likely grew more significant as time passed.
The relative age effect becomes less impactful as children get older and the gap between the youngest and oldest students becomes less significant. But researchers have found that relatively younger children on average still score significantly lower than their older classmates until at least the eighth grade.
The difference in test scores can widen the gap caused by the relative age effect significantly. Relatively younger schoolchildren repeat grades more frequently than their older classmates. Even if they do advance to the next grade, they are less likely to be chosen for advanced coursework, like gifted and talented programs or AP classes. This practice is known as “tracking,” and it plays a significant role in perpetuating the relative age effect in later years when the direct influence of the effect dissipates. However, because you were placed in advanced classes or programs, you were better positioned to compensate for the skills gap you likely experienced as a consequence of being relatively younger in school.
The relative age effect becomes less impactful as children get older and the gap between the youngest and oldest students becomes less significant. But researchers have found that relatively younger children on average still score significantly lower than their older classmates until at least the eighth grade.
The difference in test scores can widen the gap caused by the relative age effect significantly. Relatively younger schoolchildren repeat grades more frequently than their older classmates. Even if they do advance to the next grade, they are less likely to be chosen for advanced coursework, like gifted and talented programs or AP classes. This practice is known as “tracking,” and it plays a significant role in perpetuating the relative age effect in later years when the direct influence of the effect dissipates. Because you were not placed in any advanced classes or programs in school, the skills gap between you and your relatively younger classmates likely shrank as time passed.
The relative age effect becomes less impactful as children get older and the gap between the youngest and oldest students becomes less significant. But researchers have found that relatively younger children on average still score significantly lower than their older classmates until at least the eighth grade.
The difference in test scores can widen the gap caused by the relative age effect significantly. Relatively younger schoolchildren repeat grades more frequently than their older classmates. Even if they do advance to the next grade, they are less likely to be chosen for advanced coursework, like gifted and talented programs or AP classes. This practice is known as “tracking,” and it plays a significant role in perpetuating the relative age effect in later years when the direct influence of the effect dissipates. Because you were placed in advanced classes or programs, you were better positioned to accumulate skills throughout your time in school, widening the gap even further between you and your relatively young classmates.
Admissions Tests
Did you take any college admissions exams, such as the SAT or ACT?
Roughly 8% fewer young students take the SAT or ACT compared to their relatively older classmates. That’s 4 in every 50 students.
The relatively youngest students are underrepresented in the “pre-university stream,” measured here as taking the SAT or ACT
Roughly 8% fewer young students take the SAT or ACT compared to their relatively older classmates. That’s 4 in every 50 students.
The relatively youngest students are underrepresented in the “pre-university stream,” measured here as taking the SAT or ACT
By the time students near the end of high school, the direct impact of the relative age effect has largely disappeared. While you could have been nearly 20% younger than your older classmates when entering kindergarten, by senior year of high school that gap could drop to as little as 6%, roughly. Yet, researchers have found that relatively younger students are 8% less likely to take a college admissions exam like the SAT or ACT. So why does the gap persist?
Researchers attribute the lingering gap to a phenomenon they call “cumulative advantage,” often referred to as the Matthew effect. The effect starts young when the relative age effect plays a greater role in the skills gap between relatively young and old students. Two researchers noted, “Relative age differences at the start of formal schooling may be long-lasting if relatively older students are better positioned to accumulate more skills in the early grades because their maturity advantage increases the likelihood that they are selected for more advanced curriculum groups or because they progress through a common curriculum at a faster rate.” Some researchers theorize that relatively younger students may be underrepresented in something like college admissions testing as a result of low self-perception and self-esteem from years of lacking academic performance compared to their older classmates.
By the time students near the end of high school, the direct impact of the relative age effect has largely disappeared. While you could have been nearly 20% younger than your older classmates when entering kindergarten, by senior year of high school that gap could drop to as little as 6%, roughly. Yet, researchers have found that relatively younger students are 8% less likely to take a college admissions exam like the SAT or ACT. So why does the gap persist?
Researchers attribute the lingering gap to a phenomenon they call “cumulative advantage,” often referred to as the Matthew effect. The effect starts young when the relative age effect plays a greater role in the skills gap between relatively young and old students. Two researchers noted, “Relative age differences at the start of formal schooling may be long-lasting if relatively older students are better positioned to accumulate more skills in the early grades because their maturity advantage increases the likelihood that they are selected for more advanced curriculum groups or because they progress through a common curriculum at a faster rate.” Some researchers theorize that relatively younger students may be underrepresented in something like college admissions testing as a result of low self-perception and self-esteem from years of lacking academic performance compared to their older classmates. It is statistically less common for someone of your relative age to have taken a college admissions exam, but there are many confounding factors, such as one’s socioeconomic background, that could have influenced such an outcome.
By the time students near the end of high school, the direct impact of the relative age effect has largely disappeared. While you could have been nearly 20% older than your older classmates when entering kindergarten, by senior year of high school that gap could drop to as little as 6%, roughly. Yet, researchers have found that relatively younger students are 8% less likely to take a college admissions exam like the SAT or ACT. So why does the gap persist?
Researchers attribute the lingering gap to a phenomenon they call “cumulative advantage,” often referred to as the Matthew effect. The effect starts young when the relative age effect plays a greater role in the skills gap between relatively young and old students. Two researchers noted, “Relative age differences at the start of formal schooling may be long-lasting if relatively older students are better positioned to accumulate more skills in the early grades because their maturity advantage increases the likelihood that they are selected for more advanced curriculum groups or because they progress through a common curriculum at a faster rate.” Some researchers theorize that relatively younger students may be underrepresented in something like college admissions testing as a result of low self-perception and self-esteem from years of lacking academic performance compared to their older classmates. It is statistically less common for someone of your relative age to not have taken a college admissions exam, but there are many confounding factors, such as one’s socioeconomic background, that could have influenced such an outcome.
By the time students near the end of high school, the direct impact of the relative age effect has largely disappeared. While you could have been nearly 20% older than your older classmates when entering kindergarten, by senior year of high school that gap could drop to as little as 6%, roughly. Yet, researchers have found that relatively younger students are 8% less likely to take a college admissions exam like the SAT or ACT. So why does the gap persist?
Researchers attribute the lingering gap to a phenomenon they call “cumulative advantage,” often referred to as the Matthew effect. The effect starts young when the relative age effect plays a greater role in the skills gap between relatively young and old students. Two researchers noted, “Relative age differences at the start of formal schooling may be long-lasting if relatively older students are better positioned to accumulate more skills in the early grades because their maturity advantage increases the likelihood that they are selected for more advanced curriculum groups or because they progress through a common curriculum at a faster rate.” Some researchers theorize that relatively younger students may be underrepresented in something like college admissions testing as a result of low self-perception and self-esteem from years of lacking academic performance compared to their older classmates.
College Enrollment
Did you enroll in a four-year college or university?
By the time a student graduates from high school, the relative age effect has effectively stopped, but the pattern of cumulative advantage it created continues.
Relatively younger students are nearly 12% less likely to enroll in a four year college than their older classmates. That’s 6 in every 50 students.
By the time a student graduates from high school, the relative age effect has effectively stopped, but the pattern of cumulative advantage it created continues.
Relatively younger students are nearly 12% less likely to enroll in a four year college than their older classmates. That’s 6 in every 50 students.
At the point of college enrollment, the relative age effect is essentially irrelevant, in and of itself. However, the pattern of cumulative advantage it ignited remains a significant influence on college enrollment outcomes. Relatively younger students, on average, miss out on the degree of skill accumulation and college preparation that their older classmates have received in the years leading up to college enrollment. Controlling for other influential factors, you were up to 12% less likely to enroll in college simply as a consequence of your relative age. Importantly, researchers note that factors like your economic background, gender, and immigration status can work to either mitigate or amplify the relative age effect.
Data is sparse and causation is difficult to isolate, but some research has found that your relative age continues to impact you beyond school. On average, relatively younger adults report lower levels of educational attainment, lower income levels, and a smaller savings capacity than their relatively older peers. Crucially, these lifelong inequalities are not the consequence of a continued skills gap between relatively younger and older students. Rather, such long-run effects are largely set into motion in early grade school, where educational structures exacerbate early childhood differences that might otherwise fizzle out by high school.
The long-term impacts of the relative age effect are not inevitable, nor universal. In Denmark, where differentiation on the basis of ability is officially prohibited before the age of sixteen, researchers have found no relative age effect. Researchers suggest that the United States should study such a system as a model for its own schools.
At the point of college enrollment, the relative age effect is essentially irrelevant, in and of itself. However, the pattern of cumulative advantage it ignited remains a significant influence on college enrollment outcomes. Relatively younger students, on average, miss out on the degree of skill accumulation and college preparation that their older classmates have received in the years leading up to college enrollment. Controlling for other influential factors, you were up to 12% less likely to enroll in college simply as a consequence of your relative age. The fact that you did still enroll suggests the influence of other factors. Researchers note that features like your economic background, gender, and immigration status can work to either mitigate or amplify the relative age effect.
Data is sparse and causation is difficult to isolate, but some research has found that your relative age continues to impact you beyond school. On average, relatively younger adults report lower levels of educational attainment, lower income levels, and a smaller savings capacity than their relatively older peers. Crucially, these lifelong inequalities are not the consequence of a continued skills gap between relatively younger and older students. Rather, such long-run effects are largely set into motion in early grade school, where educational structures exacerbate early childhood differences that might otherwise fizzle out by high school.
The long-term impacts of the relative age effect are not inevitable, nor universal. In Denmark, where differentiation on the basis of ability is officially prohibited before the age of sixteen, researchers have found no relative age effect. Researchers suggest that the United States should study such a system as a model for its own schools.
At the point of college enrollment, the relative age effect is essentially irrelevant, in and of itself. However, the pattern of cumulative advantage it ignited remains a significant influence on college enrollment outcomes. Relatively older students, on average, receive a degree of skill accumulation and college preparation that their younger classmates have missed out on in the years leading up to college enrollment. Controlling for other influential factors, you were up to 12% more likely to enroll in college simply as a consequence of your relative age. The fact that you didn’t enroll suggests the influence of other factors. Researchers note that features like your economic background, gender, and immigration status can work to either mitigate or amplify the relative age effect.
Data is sparse and causation is difficult to isolate, but some research has found that your relative age continues to impact you beyond school. On average, relatively older adults report higher levels of educational attainment, higher income levels, and a greater savings capacity than their relatively younger peers. Crucially, these lifelong inequalities are not the consequence of a continued skills gap between relatively younger and older students. Rather, such long-run effects are largely set into motion in early grade school, where educational structures exacerbate early childhood differences that might otherwise fizzle out by high school.
The long-term impacts of the relative age effect are not inevitable, nor universal. In Denmark, where differentiation on the basis of ability is officially prohibited before the age of sixteen, researchers have found no relative age effect. Researchers suggest that the United States should study such a system as a model for its own schools.
At the point of college enrollment, the relative age effect is essentially irrelevant, in and of itself. However, the pattern of cumulative advantage it ignited remains a significant influence on college enrollment outcomes. Relatively older students, on average, receive a degree of skill accumulation and college preparation that their younger classmates have missed out on in the years leading up to college enrollment. Controlling for other influential factors, you were up to 12% more likely to enroll in college simply as a consequence of your relative age. Importantly, researchers note that factors like your economic background, gender, and immigration status can work to either mitigate or amplify the relative age effect.
Data is sparse and causation is difficult to isolate, but some research has found that your relative age continues to impact you beyond school. On average, relatively older adults report higher levels of educational attainment, higher income levels, and a greater savings capacity than their relatively younger peers. Crucially, these lifelong inequalities are not the consequence of a continued skills gap between relatively younger and older students. Rather, such long-run effects are largely set into motion in early grade school, where educational structures exacerbate early childhood differences that might otherwise fizzle out by high school.
The long-term impacts of the relative age effect are not inevitable, nor universal. In Denmark, where differentiation on the basis of ability is officially prohibited before the age of sixteen, researchers have found no relative age effect. Researchers suggest that the United States should study such a system as a model for its own schools.